IMO 2021/2 www.calimath.

org updated on February 23, 2023

Problem. Show that the inequality

n X
X n q n X
X n q
|xi − xj | ⩽ |xi + xj |
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1

holds for all real numbers x1 , . . . , xn .

After trying to solve the problem on your own, you can find a possible solution on the next page.

1 solution by Richard
IMO 2021/2 www.calimath.org updated on February 23, 2023

Problem. Show that the inequality

n X
X n q n X
X n q
|xi − xj | ⩽ |xi + xj |
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1

holds for all real numbers x1 , . . . , xn .

Proof. We start with the general idea: Let

n X
X n q
f (t) := |xi + xj − 2t|.
i=1 j=1

f (t) is the value of the RHS for x′i

= xi − t. Since the LHS is invariant with respect to t under
that substitution, it is enough to prove the inequality for (x′i )i=1,...,n = (xi − t∗ )i=1,...,n such that
x +x
f (t∗ ) is minimal. We will prove that when this is the case, then t∗ = i0 2 j0 for some indices
1 ≤ i0 , j0 ≤ n. In that case, we observe that summing only over indices i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}\{i0 , j0 }
doesn’t change the inequality. Thus, the statement follows from induction for n − 2 if i0 ̸= j0
and n − 1 if i0 = j0 . The base cases n ∈ {0, 1} are clear.

p For n = 0, the inequality is 0 ≤ 0, which is true and for n = 1, the inequality is 0 ≤

|x1 + x1 |, which is true. Now, we take n ≥ 2 and assume the inequality always holds for n − 1
and n − 2.
Since limx→−∞ f (x) = limx→∞ f (x) = ∞, we can choose T large enough such that ∀x ∈ R, |x| ≥
T : f (x) > f (0). √ √
We use the fact thatp[0, ∞) → R, x 7→ x and (−∞, 0] → R, x 7→ −x p are concave func-
tions1 . Thus, x 7→ |x| is concave on [0, ∞) and (−∞, 0]. Hence, t 7→ |xi + xj − 2t| is
xi +xj xi +xj
concave n on any interval Io ⊆ (−∞, 2 ] or I ⊆ [ 2 , ∞). We define {α 1 , . . . , αN } :=
xi +xj p
A := 2 : 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n , α1 < · · · < αn . So, t 7→ |xi + xj − 2t| is concave on the in-
tervals I0 := [ −T , α1 ], Ik := {αk , αk+1 }, IN := [αN , |{z}
T ]. And since the sum of concave
|{z}
=:α0 =:αN +1
functions is concave, we conclude that f is concave on I0 , . . . , IN . Since f is continuous and
[−T, T ] is compact, f attains its infimum2 over [−T, T ] at some point t∗ ∈ [−T, T ]. Because
∀x ∈ R\[−T, T ] : f (x) > f (0) ≥ inf f (R), we conclude f (t∗ ) = inf f ([−T, T ]) = min f ([−T, T ]) =
SN
min f (R). Since [−T, T ] ⊆ k=0 Ik (this is not necessarilly an equality because we do not require
T ≥ max{−α1 , αN }), there exists some 0 ≤ k ∗ ≤ N such that t∗ ∈ Ik∗ . Concavity of f on Ik∗
implies by definition that
f (t∗ ) ≥ λf (αk∗ ) + (1 − λ)f (αk∗ +1 ) ≥ min{f (αk∗ ), f (αk∗ +1 )}
α ∗ −t∗ ∗
with λ := αkk∗ +1 −αk∗ ∈ [0, 1] since αk < αk 1 . Thus, min{f (αk ), f (αk +1 )} = f (t ) =
+1
∗ + ∗ ∗

min(f (R)). So, we may WLOG assume that t∗ ∈ {αk∗ , αk∗ +1 }. Since f (α0 ), f (αN +1 ) > f (0) ≥
x +x
min(f (R)), it follows that t∗ ∈ A and thus t∗ = i0 2 j0 for 1 ≤ i0 , j0 ≤ n. WLOG assume
n − 1 ≤ i0 ≤ j0 = n. For x′i := xi − t∗ ∀1 ≤ i ≤ n, we have
Xn X n q n X
X n q n X
X n q
|xi + xj | − |xi − xj | = f (0) − |xi − xj |
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1
n X
X n q n X
X n q Xn X n q
≥f (t∗ ) − |xi − xj | = |x′i + x′j | − |x′i − x′j |.
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1

If i0 = j0 (= n), we have t∗ = xn +x
2
n
= xn and thus x′n = xn − xn = 0. Therefore, it follows from
the inductive assumption that
n X
X n q n X
X n q n−1
X n−1
Xq n−1
X n−1
Xq
|x′i + x′j | − |x′i − x′j | = |x′i + x′j | − |x′i − x′j | ≥ 0.
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1
1 https://calimath.org/wiki/concave-functions
2 https://calimath.org/wiki/infimum

2 solution by Richard
IMO 2021/2 www.calimath.org updated on February 23, 2023

If i0 ̸= j0 (= n), we have i0 = n − 1. Therefore, t∗ = xn−12+xn and thus x′n = xn −x 2

n−1
= −x′n−1 .
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
So, we get ∀1 ≤ j ≤ n : |xn − xj | = |xn−1 + xj | and |xn + xj | = |xn−1 − xj |. Therefore, it follows
from the inductive assumption that
n X
X n q n X
X n q n−2
X n−2
Xq n−2
X n−2
Xq
|x′i + x′j | − |x′i − x′j | = |x′i + x′j | − |x′i − x′j | ≥ 0.
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1

In any case, we obtain

n X
X n q n X
X n q n X
X n q n X
X n q
|xi + xj | − |xi − xj | ≥ |x′i + x′j | − |x′i − x′j | ≥ 0.
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1

q.e.d.
Remark 1. This IMO problem was critizized for requiring knowledge beyond the scope of high
school students. In this solution, we used the facts that
√ √
1. x is concave on [0, ∞) and −x is concave on (−∞, 0],
2. a continuous function attains its minimum on a compact interval [a, b] ⊆ R, a ≤ b
without proof. Both can be cited in any solution. The first one can be checked by showing that
the second derivative of both functions is negative on (0, ∞) and (−∞, 0), which is (for twice
differentiable functions) non-trivially equivalent to concavity. The second fact is also non-trivial.

We want to give a short elementary proof for the first fact by veryfiying the definition of concavity
directly: We have ∀x, y ∈ [0, ∞)∀λ ∈ [0, 1] :
p √ √
λx + (1 − λ)y ≥ λ x + (1 − λ) y
√
⇐⇒ λx + (1 − λ)y ≥ λ2 x + (1 − λ)2 y + 2λ(1 − λ) xy
√
⇐⇒ (λ − λ2 )x + (1 − λ − (1 − 2λ + λ2 ))y ≥ 2λ(1 − λ) xy
√
⇐⇒ λ(1 − λ)(x + y − 2 xy) ≥ 0
√ √
⇐⇒ λ(1 − λ)( x − y)2 ≥ 0,

where the last inequality is clearly true. Thus, we also get

p √ √
∀x, y ∈ (−∞, 0]∀λ ∈ [0, 1] : −(λx + (1 − λ)y) ≥ λ −x + (1 − λ) −y.
√ √
Thus, x is concave on [0, ∞) and −x is concave on (−∞, 0].

3 solution by Richard